ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

Does it make sense to use Require.js with Angular.js? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post. Closed 8 years ago. Improve this question

I'm a newbie to Angular.js and trying to understand how it's different from Backbone.js... We used to manage our packages dependencies with Require.js while using Backbone. Does it make sense to do the same with Angular.js?

Another blog and seed project: startersquad.com/blog/angularjs-requirejs
No - Don't use require.js OR browserify with Angular.JS there is simply no need to do that - AngularJS has a module system and using another module system above it will make your life unnecessarily hard. I've followed the answers in this thread and wasted too many hours on something that was completely needless. Please read this article that explains why not: medium.com/@dickeyxxx/…
Read this to understand the difference between angular and require modules juristr.com/blog/2014/07/lazy-angular-modules
here is a great video that explains why it's a good idea and shows how to use requireJS with angularJS youtube.com/watch?v=4yulGISBF8w#t=142
@VitalyB Nice article! I favor loading applications in small pieces. It will cost nothing soon enough. Heck, it doesn't cost anything for me right now.

T
Trilarion

Yes it makes sense to use angular.js along with require.js wherein you can use require.js for modularizing components.

There is a seed project which uses both angular.js and require.js.


The seed project mentioned above has not been touched for a year so I've created a new one using latest AngularJS and RequireJS with full support for testacular-driven testing.
@tnajdek, I updated the link in Anshu's answer to point to the one you suggest.
Note that neither of those seed projects are endorsed by the Angular team. Require is a pattern that made more sense in other contexts, and shoe-horning it into Angular is not, IMHO, a best-practice.
The O'Reilly AngularJS book by Brad Green & Shyam Seshadri (released April of this year) also recommends adding RequireJS early in the growth of an Angular project, and lays out details quite clearly.
I'd much rather do everything at build time 1. browserify.org 2. npmjs.org/package/gulp-angular-filesort
C
Community

To restate what I think the OP's question really is:

If I'm building an application principally in Angular 1.x, and (implicitly) doing so in the era of Grunt/Gulp/Broccoli and Bower/NPM, and I maybe have a couple additional library dependencies, does Require add clear, specific value beyond what I get by using Angular without Require?

Or, put another way:

"Does vanilla Angular need Require to manage basic Angular component-loading effectively, if I have other ways of handling basic script-loading?"

And I believe the basic answer to that is: "not unless you've got something else going on, and/or you're unable to use newer, more modern tools."

Let's be clear at the outset: RequireJS is a great tool that solved some very important problems, and started us down the road that we're on, toward more scalable, more professional Javascript applications. Importantly, it was the first time many people encountered the concept of modularization and of getting things out of global scope. So, if you're going to build a Javascript application that needs to scale, then Require and the AMD pattern are not bad tools for doing that.

But, is there anything particular about Angular that makes Require/AMD a particularly good fit? No. In fact, Angular provides you with its own modularization and encapsulation pattern, which in many ways renders redundant the basic modularization features of AMD. And, integrating Angular modules into the AMD pattern is not impossible, but it's a bit... finicky. You'll definitely be spending time getting the two patterns to integrate nicely.

For some perspective from the Angular team itself, there's this, from Brian Ford, author of the Angular Batarang and now a member of the Angular core team:

I don't recommend using RequireJS with AngularJS. Although it's certainly possible, I haven't seen any instance where RequireJS was beneficial in practice.

So, on the very specific question of AngularJS: Angular and Require/AMD are orthogonal, and in places overlapping. You can use them together, but there's no reason specifically related to the nature/patterns of Angular itself.

But what about basic management of internal and external dependencies for scalable Javascript applications? Doesn't Require do something really critical for me there?

I recommend checking out Bower and NPM, and particularly NPM. I'm not trying to start a holy war about the comparative benefits of these tools. I merely want to say: there are other ways to skin that cat, and those ways may be even better than AMD/Require. (They certainly have much more popular momentum in late-2015, particularly NPM, combined with ES6 or CommonJS modules. See related SO question.)

What about lazy-loading?

Note that lazy-loading and lazy-downloading are different. Angular's lazy-loading doesn't mean you're pulling them direct from the server. In a Yeoman-style application with javascript automation, you're concatenating and minifying the whole shebang together into a single file. They're present, but not executed/instantiated until needed. The speed and bandwidth improvements you get from doing this vastly, vastly outweigh any alleged improvements from lazy-downloading a particular 20-line controller. In fact, the wasted network latency and transmission overhead for that controller is going to be an order of magnitude greater than the size of the controller itself.

But let's say you really do need lazy-downloading, perhaps for infrequently-used pieces of your application, such as an admin interface. That's a very legitimate case. Require can indeed do that for you. But there are also many other, potentially more flexible options that accomplish the same thing. And Angular 2.0 will apparently take care of this for us, built-in to the router. (Details.)

But what about during development on my local dev boxen?

How can I get all my dozens/hundreds of script files loaded without needing to attach them all to index.html manually?

Have a look at the sub-generators in Yeoman's generator-angular, or at the automation patterns embodied in generator-gulp-angular, or at the standard Webpack automation for React. These provide you a clean, scalable way to either: automatically attach the files at the time that components are scaffolded, or to simply grab them all automatically if they are present in certain folders/match certain glob-patterns. You never again need to think about your own script-loading once you've got the latter options.

Bottom-line?

Require is a great tool, for certain things. But go with the grain whenever possible, and separate your concerns whenever possible. Let Angular worry about Angular's own modularization pattern, and consider using ES6 modules or CommonJS as a general modularization pattern. Let modern automation tools worry about script-loading and dependency-management. And take care of async lazy-loading in a granular way, rather than by tangling it up with the other two concerns.

That said, if you're developing Angular apps but can't install Node on your machine to use Javascript automation tools for some reason, then Require may be a good alternate solution. And I've seen really elaborate setups where people want to dynamically load Angular components that each declare their own dependencies or something. And while I'd probably try to solve that problem another way, I can see the merits of the idea, for that very particular situation.

But otherwise... when starting from scratch with a new Angular application and flexibility to create a modern automation environment... you've got a lot of other, more flexible, more modern options.

(Updated repeatedly to keep up with the evolving JS scene.)


The NG-Boilerplate seed project (github.com/ngbp/ngbp) also creates a single page webapp with one js file. Using a HTML5 manifest makes sure this file is only loaded once per version.
Though, as always, it depends. Many people use Require for their entire architecture, and need to integrate Angular into that ecosystem. It's a very different situation than when you're building apps in isolation.
Agreed. But the OP's thrust seems to be: "If I'm building an application principally in Angular, and (implicitly) doing so in the era of Grunt, and I maybe have a couple additional library dependencies, does Require add clear, specific value beyond what I get by using Angular without Require?" And I believe, the answer is: no. If you have a huge application with 40 outside dependencies, or you can't control your CI environment, or your boss adores Require, or you adore Require, or Angular is only one piece of a larger application, etc., etc., then YMMV.
But since he doesn't seem to ask those questions, and since he simply mentions the alternate context of a Backbone app, he seems to ask: "does vanilla Angular need Require to manage its components effectively?" And the answer is: "not unless you've got something else going on." Also, this question came on the cusp of the Javascript CI movement, wherein we got much better ways to handle basic, physical 'script-loading'. If you have that problem solved, Require is basically about dependency-matching and encapsulation. Angular does both of those things for you.
Google uses lazy-loading in some of it's AngularJS projects, because otherwise, the user would be downloading 24mb of files on the first page load (and this is with files uglified and concatenated). So yes, in complex applications it doesn't make to just concatenate all the sections, when there are sections the user won't be opening with every visit.
P
Pavlo

Yes, it makes sense.

Angular modules don't try to solve the problem of script load ordering or lazy script fetching. These goals are orthogonal and both module systems can live side by side and fulfil their goals. Source: Angular JS official website


If you use one module per js file you can load your angular module on any order. But if you want to put for example different services in different js files but you want to attach them on the same angular module you have to load the module declaration before the services declaration. So this is a an architecture decision.
@Tiago: Please provide a link to the location you sourced this from. I can't find it anywhere. I'm guessing that it came from an earlier version of the Angular docs, before Angular's patterns had become as well established, and before it had become clear that there are significant advantages to avoiding Require, at least for Angular components.
@XMLilley: can you provide a link that explains the advantages of avoiding Require when using Angular? I'm deciding whether or not to use Require in my project and this sounds like it would be helpful.
I was unclear in my language here: there are significant advantages to leveraging Angular's own built-in module-loaders, and going with the grain of Angular patterns. The question is not whether to avoid Require, but rather whether there is value to adding an additional layer of complexity. What is clear is that Angular's built-in patterns will handily and elegantly address the need for the loading of Angular's own modules. If Require serves a purpose for loading modules outside of Angular context, then so be it. But using Require for Angular is extraneous.
@XMLilley all Angular does is give you dependency injection. The actual loading of the module is your responsibility. You can do this either by adding a script tag, having a build script or using requirejs. Angulars module system has no opinion on this.
g
ganaraj

This I believe is a subjective question, so I will provide my subjective opinion.

Angular has a modularization mechanism built in. When you create your app, the first thing you would do is

var app = angular.module("myApp");

and then

app.directive(...);

app.controller(...);

app.service(...);

If you have a look at the angular-seed which is neat starter app for angular, they have separated out the directives, services, controllers etc into different modules and then loaded those modules as dependancies on your main app.

Something like :

var app = angular.module("myApp",["Directives","Controllers","Services"];

Angular also lazy loads these modules ( into memory) not their script files.

In terms of lazy loading script files, to be frank unless you are writing something extremely large it would be an overkill because angular by its very nature reduces the amount of code you write. A typical app written in most other frameworks could expect a reduction in around 30-50% in LOC if written in angular.


Indeed, it's better configure services in Angular.js than load modules with Require.js. This makes it easier to play with the $scope and services, as I played with Socket.io
l
leog

Using RequireJS with AngularJS makes sense but only if you understand how each of them works regarding dependency injection, as although both of them injects dependencies, they inject very different things.

AngularJS has its own dependency system that let you inject AngularJS modules to a newly created module in order to reuse implementations. Let's say you created a "first" module that implements an AngularJS filter "greet":

angular
  .module('first', [])
  .filter('greet', function() {
    return function(name) {
      return 'Hello, ' + name + '!';
    }
  });

And now let's say you want to use the "greet" filter in another module called "second" that implements a "goodbye" filter. You may do that injecting the "first" module to the "second" module:

angular
  .module('second', ['first'])
  .filter('goodbye', function() {
    return function(name) {
      return 'Good bye, ' + name + '!';
    }
  });

The thing is that in order to make this work correctly without RequireJS, you have to make sure that the "first" AngularJS module is loaded on the page before you create the "second" AngularJS module. Quoting documentation:

Depending on a module implies that required module needs to be loaded before the requiring module is loaded.

In that sense, here is where RequireJS can help you as RequireJS provides a clean way to inject scripts to the page helping you organize script dependencies between each other.

Going back to the "first" and "second" AngularJS modules, here is how you can do it using RequireJS separating the modules on different files to leverage script dependencies loading:

// firstModule.js file
define(['angular'], function(angular) {
  angular
    .module('first', [])
    .filter('greet', function() {
      return function(name) {
        return 'Hello, ' + name + '!';
      }
    });
});
// secondModule.js file
define(['angular', 'firstModule'], function(angular) {
  angular
    .module('second', ['first'])
    .filter('goodbye', function() {
      return function(name) {
        return 'Good bye, ' + name + '!';
      }
    });
});

You can see that we are depending on "firstModule" file to be injected before the content of the RequireJS callback can be executed which needs "first" AngularJS module to be loaded to create "second" AngularJS module.

Side note: Injecting "angular" on the "firstModule" and "secondModule" files as dependency is required in order to use AngularJS inside the RequireJS callback function and it have to be configured on RequireJS config to map "angular" to the library code. You may have AngularJS loaded to the page in a traditional manner too (script tag) although defeats RequireJS benefits.

More details on having RequireJS support from AngularJS core from 2.0 version on my blog post.

Based on my blog post "Making sense of RequireJS with AngularJS", here is the link.


It's actually best, when including a link, to summarize the contents of the link here on Stack Overflow. If your link were to ever break, which links do on the Internet, your answer here would be useless to future visitors. Consider an edit to bring in a summary and improve this post. Good luck!
There you go, thanks jmort253.
Thanks for making these edits and explaining how RequireJS can help manage the dependencies to avoid issues with Angular trying to load something that doesn't yet exist.
i totally agree, it is best to use this approach for large applications if not you will be having multiple